Ok. So I saw this article. A baker agreed to make this cake for 'free' to be presented to Lebron James at his birthday party. It was agreed that her bakery would get the publicity/advertisement associated with presenting him with the cake.
On the day of his party, someone decided her cake wasn't "fit" to be presented to James so it was discarded. (At least that's whats presumed.) Now the baker wants them to pay her the $3000 for the cake since they renigged on their deal and she did not receive the publicity, etc... The 'handlers' of Lebron James refuse to pay her saying, and I quote, "It's flour, eggs, and water."
My question. They actually owe her the money right? I mean, I thought the cake looked fine. She made the cake, delivered the cake, the cake was accepted, then discarded later. I'm just a little confused here. How can they claim not to owe her anything when they didn't uphold their end of the deal?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/LeBron-James-rejects-his-3500-birthday-cake-as?urn=nba-wp12773
My question. They actually owe her the money right? I mean, I thought the cake looked fine. She made the cake, delivered the cake, the cake was accepted, then discarded later. I'm just a little confused here. How can they claim not to owe her anything when they didn't uphold their end of the deal?
This is a repost (check the CD forum) but if the contract says that the customer reserves the right to reject the cake if it's not up to their standards, then they don't owe the baker a penny.
Posted earlier today:
http://cakecentral.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=737264
Quote by @%username% on %date%
%body%